Sunday, 16 October 2011

There has been a small kerfuffle about what to do with the old YWG airport terminal now that the fancy-pants James Richardson International terminal is opening. Heritage advocates are crying out for somebody to save it, because it is an excellent example of mid-century modernist architecture. That may be, but modernist architecture happens to be the acid wash jeans of the architecture world. Nobody, for example, would ever say “Wait! Don’t throw out those parachute pants -- they’re still perfectly good!”

Modernism ranges from the bland and block-ish, like our terminal, to the Jetson-ish stylings of the Winnipeg Clinic building, where the designers gambled on the look of the future and lost. But looks aside, the terminal building has a couple of other knocks against it: size and location. It is big and expensive to maintain, and it’s located (obviously) at an airport, which drastically limits potential uses, as does the purpose-built interior that would require massive renovations for almost any other use.

Heritage advocates should pick their fights. We have a hard enough time preserving our turn of the century classics in the exchange district to be distracted by this. If a legitimate proposal comes forward that doesn’t require a bundle of government money, then fine .. but otherwise take one last good look and say good bye.

*****

Blog action day

Apparently today was blog action day. Apparently this year’s subject was food. I do not have anything to contribute because (and this is true) I was busy building a garden. A small raised vegetable garden for next summer. Plus I completely forgot that it was blog action day. That was a factor too.

I read that bilingualism prolonged cognitive function in people suffering from Alzheimer's disease. Brain scans showed that “bilingual patients had twice as much atrophy” when diagnosed as unilingual patients, leading to the conclusion that speaking two languages helps you overcome brain damage from the disease. That is one possibility, but I think the researchers are missing the obvious conclusion: that speaking French causes brain damage.

*****

Late addition: Ramblin' Dan

I feel I'm not offering you enough with this post, so here is a video for you ... local artist, prolific songwriter, and old buddy of mine "Rambling" Dan Frechette, with a reggae-ish tune recorded at the Park Theatre a couple weeks ago:

Friday, 14 October 2011

Hmm .. I see that it's been a while since I've done a beer review. Well okay then, here we go:

The bottle tells me that Lia Fail means "Stone of Destiny" in Gaelic. The Irish Republic Party Fianna Fáil is translated as "Soldiers of Destiny". Therefore, with my super intelligent Mensa-eating ultra-brain I have deduced the following:

Fail = Destiny

Lia = Stone

Fianna = Soldiers

Thus I have learned three new words today, and so have you! I also presume that Lia Fianna, though it may sound really gay, actually means "Stone Soldiers". Someone out there should name their son that. I dare you.

The bottle also tells me that Lia Fail is "distinctively rich", and that it's "from the heart of Scotland", and there is also a Celtic Cross on the label further adding to the mystique. This here brew has a lot to live up to.

The bottle also tells me that Lia Fail is a "Scottish Dark Beer", although Beer Advocate tells me that it's more precisely an Ale. She comes in a 500 ml bottle and weighs in at a welterweight 4.7% alcohol. The ale pours a cloudy copper colour with a nice foamy off-white head. My nose picks up toffey and citrus, and a little bit of foam if I stick it in too far. The beer feels a little flat in the mouth when you drink it, and I can't say that there is an explosion of flavour exactly. I can taste hops, and maybe ... rye bread? There is a finish of orange peel and stomach acid. It's not as bad as that sounds.

So: is it a pass or a ... *ahem* ... Fáil ? I'll give it a marginal pass. I was a little disappointed after reading the label, but it turned out to be a run-of-the-mill British ale, which is still better than most of the factory beer you get in the vendors. Give it a try. It is your destiny.

Friday, 7 October 2011

OK ... no more posting about politics for a little while ... like two years or so. My subject matter today is, I think, much more appealing: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles! Enjoy:

***

I have been following a collective art blog called Gorilla Artfare for a while now. While I pride myself in being able to doodle better than at least 30% of the general population, I have mad respect for those who are truly talented. I also think that the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are one of the best cartoon concepts ever; and this is where Dave Raposa comes in.

Dave, who contributes to Gorilla Artfare under the alias Mr.Delicious, started on a series of TMNT fan art a few months ago and has produced some stunning work. Please click on the links to see the pictures in full size, and see the rest of his GA portfolio here. For some reason he has not posted the final two Turtles, Raphael and Michelangelo, on GA, but you can see them on the previous link to his personal web site.

Monday, 3 October 2011

I sat down with The Green Party of Manitoba leader James Beddome for a coffee at Stella's on Sherbrook. I do not guarantee that the transcript that follows is 100% accurate, but it is at least a close approximation:

*****

Anybody Want A Peanut?: So, some background: you're studying to become a lawyer ... what brings you into this nasty, dirty arena of Manitoba politics? Why not work as a lawyer for 10 years, make a pile of cash, and then enter politics?

James Beddome: You know, politics has always been my passion. At a very young age I have wanted to get into politics. I think I looked at it the other way: law was going to be my way into politics, along with a Political Science and Economics degree. So for me, the question is why not be involved, and how could I not be involved? I literally am a little bit of a political animal, so that's why I am involved and I'm enjoying it as it goes along, and I hope that I get elected as MLA, but if that doesn't work out, then the plan B is I go through law school and I'll see what happens in four years.

AWAP: You did a great job in the televised debate.

JB: Thank you.

AWAP: You have been excluded from other forums, though you seem to be getting more recognition in the media. But as a party that does not have any members in the legislature and does not have a full slate of candidates, why should the Green Party be considered as one of the big players?

JB: I think that all parties should be included, and I extend that beyond the Green Party, because I think it's really important that we get the ideas out there. I think voters are smart enough to be able to determine which ideas are good for themselves, and to not include the smaller parties creates such a structural disadvantage in the sense that all you hear is the status quo ideas. I think it's good for people to hear new bold ideas, even if they're not ready to agree with them, because I think it helps to create change in and of itself.

AWAP: But you have to draw a line somewhere...

JB: Our argument was that we had candidates in 56% of the seats -- 32 of the 57. We did want a full slate. We're going to keep pushing for that four years from now, so our point is we want some credibility, we are becoming a provincial party: we've got a candidate in Flin Flon, we've got a candidate in Kewatinook, we've got a candidate in Brandon, we've got rural candidates and we've got candidates in Winnipeg, so it's not as if we don't have fairly accurate diversity and representation. I should put another diversity plug out there: we have a 50% female slate, we've got I think five candidates of aboriginal and/or Métis descent, and two people you could identify as visible minorities as well as people who are part of the gay and lesbian community, so we have full diversity in Manitoba.

AWAP: Okay. So... tax: In the past 12 years the tax brackets have rarely been increased, resulting in a de facto tax increase every year, and we have one of the lowest basic personal exemptions in Canada, meaning overall we are one of the highest taxed provinces in the federation. Does the Green Party promote any meaningful tax reform?

JB: Ya, we propose bold tax reform, and I have to be frank and admit that we know it will take a while to implement, so what we're trying to sell as a party is that, look, we'll give you the 20-year vision and work towards it rather than people who only look at their four year fortunes. So, to go to our tax plan, it actually deals with what I talked about on the debate which is the universal basic income, and it would work as a de facto positive tax exemption.

The way that we want to structure it is such that everyone is guaranteed a certain set minimum -- let's say $10,000 per year.. maybe that's too high, but it works well for the numbers that I'll use here -- so, $10,000 per year is what people would be guaranteed to receive -- about $800 per month -- so you have that positive amount. Now, on every dollar you earn ... let's go high, let's say 50% -- now I know that's going to scare voters but this is just hypothetical ... but if we're taking 50% of every dollar you earn but you're guaranteed $10,000, when you start earning $20,000 you've actually paid fully back into the system. The system would operate in such a way that it ladders up as you earn an income. It's a more fair way that we think we could reform the tax system. Now it would require a lot of cooperation from the Feds, and we think we could replace a lot of social service programs -- employment insurance, other social services, employment and income assistance programs -- with this, while still retaining some special programs for people with disabilities. So we think it's a bold way to reform the entire tax system. I'm not naive enough to think that it will happen overnight, but that's why I hope we get into the legislature and have some of the resources available to research this, talk to the people in the tax department and have a little more weight as to why I'm requesting this information ... why I should be entitled to have it.

AWAP: One thing that I write a lot about on my humble little blog is Bipole III. We've talked a little bit about this before. If I understand the Green Party's position, it's that the Bipole III line doesn't need to be built at all. We can use our existing capacity and build on that with conservation and clean energy. Is that more or less correct?

JB: That's fairly correct. I would just caution it with saying that we may build it at some point, but what I think is most important is that our own regulator, the Public Utilities Board, is warning that we may lose money on these export deals that we're signing. Maybe over time we'll be able to pay down this debt, but of course Manitoba Hydro wants to increase its debt to equity ratio. We don't have a Manitoba energy plan. We have some good programs like Power Smart, but I don't think we've taken energy conservation seriously in terms actually trying to focus on demand management. Further to that, we think that there is a lot of capacity in southern Manitoba for the 1000MW of wind energy that's already licensed. That adds to your reliability factor because you have some local electricity -- granted intermittent electricity, so there is a need to overcome some of the technological barriers with intermittent renewable energies -- but the fact that we have the base of hydro that we can generally count on I think very much helps us, because we can learn to become leading edge managers in what they call "smart grid technology" and how you manage energy flow with intermittent energy and a baseline of stable electricity, in our case hydro. So, it's sort of like "let's hold off and think this thing through." We don't have to build it right away. The real driver for building Bipole III is Keeyask and Conawapa, so what we're trying to say is let's not just talk about one line, let's talk about the whole energy development strategy and then let's try to map out an actual plan, and I think there are so many more possibilities that might open up if we look into creating an actual plan.

AWAP: Your hair always looks great.. Do you have a stylist you can recommend, or certain products that you use?

JB: (laughing) Really I don't even have a consistent styling product that I use, but thank you. The Free Press has some pictures of my hair dangling in my face so it doesn't always look great.

AWAP: Actually it's better that way.

JB: Oh you think the hair in the face works? Okay..

AWAP: As a former employee of AECL, one thing that caught my eye was a promise by your party to stop, if I understand it, the transportation of nuclear products across Manitoba. I can tell you, as far as risks to the population goes, this is one of the smallest ...

JB: It may be a fairly small risk. I know that they have very secure cement containers. I guess for us the biggest problem though is they want to store it up in Creighton Saskatchewan, is basically the issue, right? They want to store waste coming from Bruce in Ontario in Saskatchewan, and what that means is the waste is going to be transported through our province, and I think that Manitoba needs to stand up and say something. Yes, the risk needs to be mitigated, but not only that it's wear and tear on our highways .. we're basically on the losing end of the stick on that one on so many levels and we need to stand up and say something. Why should we get pushed over by Ontario and Saskatchewan? I do know that it's a small risk but there are a lot of people who are concerned about it and I suppose Greens are not particularly in favour of nuclear energy. The waste factor makes it problematic, so part of it comes from that.

AWAP: All of the other party leaders seem to be in favour of hiring more police officers for Winnipeg, even though we have high per capita staffing levels already. I know you have a different idea about that. Explain ...

JB: Ya, it's about actually interacting police with the community. Basically what we would like to do is embed police officers in the same community on a regular basis. So in my riding here in Wolseley you would have, I don’t know the staffing levels so this is hypothetical, let's say you had 6 police officers, that's 2 police officers per day on a rotating shift. So let's just say .. you would have two officers who regularly work in Wolseley all the time. They would get to know the people in the neighbourhood. If you get to know the people in the neighbourhood they will be more comfortable confiding information and you will also be able to figure out the patterns and habits of people and you'll have a better idea of where you should be keeping a closer eye, and we think that's a way of making policing more effective. The province already funds police officers here in Winnipeg and in other places in Manitoba, and basically what we're saying is, we're fine with that but here is how we want you to implement it. There is a lot of power with the province to actually work with municipalities in terms of offering funding but making it conditional on certain conditions.

AWAP: I was going to ask you about that too, because Winnipeg is a big battleground and all of the parties are planning things for Winnipeg: soccer fields, police officers -- here is how many we want you to hire and how to deploy them. Why is it the province's responsibility to sort of micromanage the city this way in the first place? Why not allow city hall to deploy officers as they see fit, or build soccer fields as they see fit?

JB: Well, because inevitably city hall is going to be coming to the province for money. That's just the reality of finances in Canada. If we're going to be funding the municipalities -- and we should be better funding our municipalities in Manitoba -- then let's try to do it in such a way that we can work constructively together. Too often we have the city and province working at opposite aims, and it's the citizens that pay. We get ineffective government and we get waste of your tax dollars because one level is trying to do one thing and the other level is trying to do the other, and it creates needless expenditure of time and money.

AWAP: Alright, so last question: there are I imagine lots of undecided voters out there who don't who to vote for because they are all promising the same thing or they're disengaged. For somebody who is going to the polling booth on Tuesday, what would you tell them if you could say something? What should be the one issue on their mind?

JB: If they don't want to vote then they need to understand that they're letting somebody else make the choice for them. If they're scared into voting for one party or the other because they're being told they have to vote strategically, they need to understand that a vote isn't just a vote for the party that's going to win, but you should vote with your conscience, vote with your heart, vote for who you think would make your best representative. You're not voting for the Premier, you're not voting against Hugh McFadyen or Greg Selinger. You're voting for the representative of your local area. People should to take that into consideration as well. I'm finding a lot of undecided voters here in Wolseley. This isn't a riding that the conservatives are going to take. This is a riding where you have a choice of a number of people and you have to make that choice.

AWAP: Good. Thank you very much and good luck in the election.

JB: Thank you very much. It was a pleasure to do the interview.

*****

The Green Party finished a distant second in Wolseley in 2007, but they have since increased in stature on the political scene. If they have a chance to win a seat, this is where they would do it. It will be interesting to watch on election night.